what happened to linuxflashplugin?

Chuck Robey chuckr at chuckr.org
Mon Feb 11 20:31:44 UTC 2008


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>>>
>>> YouTube? Isn't the right spelling YouPorn?
>>
>> No, it isn't. If you find nothing worth watching on *You*Tube, it
>> doesn't mean that others can't find interesting things. For example, I
>> find there a lot of good and difficult-to-find material from some fields
>> of art.
> 
> get this interestinf stuff down to your disk with youtube-dl, then watch
> with mplayer.
> 
> at least you will have it on your disk, not download each time as
> youtube does everything to prevent caching the stuff.
> as it's exactly agains efficiency, they have a reason to do this.
> 
> any explanations why? i think because then they are able to keep
> "control" on the stuff, being able to remove anything at will, with no
> copy on users computers.

All you folks who are focussing on YouTube are (purposefully?  I don't
know) the fact that with just about half of the entire Web using flash in
one way or antoehr, not using Flash is a huge problem, as anyone who
browses without a flashplayer knows.

I dunno which license folks have been reading,  This thread has gone on so
long, I can't keep track anymore, but I do know that the link I saw from
Adobe's site, referring to Flashplayer, doesn't mention (at all, even in
passing) either Linux OR FreeBSD.  They do ask you know to modify it
(decompile, whatever) but there is an explicit loophole left, in order for
folks to be able to adapt it to run on their platform.

As far as the complaint about distributing it, we have LOTS of software in
the same category, which seems to be possible for us to deal with, such as,
well, anyone ever heard of Sun's Java?  If we can do Java, we can do the
flashplugin just the same.

Someone has their dander up over licensing agreements (that's possible, I
get that way) and are purposely interpreting the license as evilly as they
can, but they are the one's who are preventing it from working on FreeBSD,
not Adobe.  Yes, those licenses are a poor joke, but if you ask me, so is
Linux's.

Jeeze, can't you find something more important to get upset about, like the
high price of beer?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHsK9zz62J6PPcoOkRAmj0AJ9eJTgzTizOSP/tAuUt5zbvs2jH5ACeLXC9
liGXhNZMKtSDMqABttmeKFY=
=mJtA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list